Slashdot at it again, this is a goodie!

Since I am still awake, I was reading through my RSS, and came across this from Slashdot: Long-term Wikipedia Vandalism Exposed

Now, I only use Wikipedia as a really quick idea, and only scan it. I do not edit there nor am I familiar with most of their policies; however, I am aware of their "no-self promotion" policy mostly because of incidents of web-comics who happen to be friends mentioning having edits about their own comics removed for "self-promotion".

(Small comment, I only read three webcomics: Terwilliger's Cafe, Minimalist Stick Figure Theatre, and Questionable Content)

Anyhow, the comments from Slashdot amused me - this is only a stub by the person that author'd the snippet on Slashdot, however:

"The accuracy of Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, came into question again when a long-standing article on 'NPA personality theory' was confirmed to be a hoax. Not only had the article survived at Wikipedia for the better part of a year, but it had even been listed as a 'Good Article,' supposedly placing it in the top 0.2-0.3% of all Wikipedia articles — despite being almost entirely written by the creator of the theory himself."

(Emphasis Mine) (Yes I deserve a capital "M")

What amuses me here is that this article went from "Good" to "The Root Of All Thing Evil™" because, as the author stats, " . . . despire being almost entirely written by the creator of the theory himself."

What entertained me - in my extremely sleep-deprived, all-night essay writing state is thus: Does being the theorist always discredit the theory? (The answer is no, dorklings) What an interesting scientific universe we'd live in if that were the case.

rolls eyes Open Soure Encyclopedias. /. is not havig a good week, between this and the plagiarism....